We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.

Everyone should title their games with their rating. The problem with studying master games is the concepts involved are just too advanced for lower rated players. Sometimes getting the perfect move is not necessary; knowing a better move than the one you were considering is better.

Most people on here either lightly annotate their games, or they ask others to do all the annotating. I learn plenty from hearing the input of a 1700 player on a 1200 player's game, but I'm sure a 1000 player would benefit far more from reading the 1200 player's self annotation.

If we all annotate our own games in detailed words before submitting them to others, and state our ratings, it will make this forum very valuable for everyone of all ratings.

If you study your own game, please post it here, even if you don't think you need our help. I think that talking about your strategy at each move is far more valuable to others than looking at 2500 level variation analysis.

anything goes oh and can we change this to where you can post imput on others games as well, because your game was good i did notice a few errors but those you found as well and i agree completely with the annotations oh and this is @Davoman

anything goes oh and can we change this to where you can post imput on others games as well, because your game was good i did notice a few errors but those you found as well and i agree completely with the annotations oh and this is @Davoman

Post all the input you want. I actually was not expecting people to post games in this thread, though I don't mind. My goal was get more people to post their games, with their own annotations, so that people can see how people of different rating levels think. I know we all want a 1700 player to annotate our games for us, but there are not enough to go around. A 1400 player will miss many blunders, but can still catch many too.

While one strategy might be better than another, it is not actually better if the player does not have the skill to pull it off. Sometimes it is better to go the easy route on the assumption the weak opponent won't see the flaws. That is not to advocate playing the player. It just means that if the agressor is too weak to see his own flaws, his opponent is probably too. And if his opponent defeats it, both will learn. If you only learn the best strategy, you never learn why the weaker ones are wrong.

One thing I like about amature games is I know there will be mistakes in them, yet unlike puzzles, I don't know where they are. We have to look at strategy and positional strength as well as looking for material. A puzzle book might not say why your move is bad, but other chess players will.

I would have played b4 (the evans gambit against Bc5(the guiacianno piannisimo))

here is one of my annotated games

@ jetfighter13c4 transposes to the English opening. You did correct though to continue your usual development and not waste time trying to figure out your opponent on the second move.5. a3 appears to be in preperation for 8. b4, a queen side pawn storm.8. It is perfectly safe to put your knight on f6. On e7, it is partially corralled by the pawn on e4.9. You have not completely your development until your rooks are free, usually after castling. And since the pawn structure is closed, your opponent's development lag is not a huge problem.10. Rb1 is in support of b4, though I agree it is premature to open the center when White has not castled and is behind on development.Actually, it is probably to free the queen so it does not have to guard b2 from your bishop.17. gxf4? 17. Bxc5 21. Bb4 is playable. Taking the knight is probably better since your knight is very dangerous and the dark squared bishop can't get to the kingside.22. Bg2? Better was Re1.22. ...Qg5? Better was ...f3.24. I don't think ... Re8 was good. You do not want to trade when you are attacking. R-c8-c5 is better. 24. I would have entertained Qh4, Rh5, Qxh2#, though you'd have to get around white playing h3. Having a rook on c5 would allow you to play Rxh3.26. White now has the e file. The rook did not need to be on f1 anyway.27. Re8+ 28. Qa5 29. Qd7+28. With White's pawn advantage, White can almost afford to trade rook for bishop, except the passed e pawn would be too dangerous. Note: White has connected pased d and c pawns, and would have a fantastic endgame after a trade off.29. ...c5?? agreed. White should have played ... h3, then continued the pawn march.30. White can still escape mate with Rxe3 hxg3+ (30. ...fxe6 31. Bxh3) 31. Qxg2 (Kg1 Re1+ 32. Kf2 g1=Q#) Qxg2 32. Kxg2 fxe3 and Black is a rook up with a passed pawn on the 6th rank vs White's two passed pawns, and will lose the endgame easily, but still escaped immediate checkmate.32. Rxe3? 32. Q-2nd rank still holds off checkmate and only drops a bishop.